2193 posts • joined 6 Nov 2009
RE: "The carriers do not like hotspots regardless of the os. "
An addendum to my previous post. It appears that all *new* phones released 'with* mango will be capable of tethering if (in common with iPhones and Android mobs) the carrier permits it. It is only currently existing WP7s that (at the present) that will not be able to use that facility.
The carriers do not like hotspots regardless of the os.
"There are, however, plenty of other features that can be used only if the network operators let you. The most desirable, enabling the phone as a Wi-Fi hotspot for up to five users, is likely to come at a hefty fee from many providers."
I seem to recall that relatively recently the US carriers started to threaten customers who did this with various penalties if they did not buy a plan that included a fee for this facility. Currently I believe that Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile all charge for tethering in one way or the other and customers risk punishment if they tether without permission.
From Sprints terms and conditions:
"Except with Phone-as-Modem plans, you may not use a phone (including a Bluetooth phone) as a modem in connection with a computer, PDA, or similar device. We reserve the right to deny or terminate service without notice for any misuse or any use that adversely affects network performance."
This has nothing to do with whether you run iOS, Android or WP7, the carriers are just being their usual selves - nothing to do with Redmond, Cupertino or Mountain View on this occasion.
In the event that you make a very successful product........
........your brand name or something associated with that product may be taken *into* the language. The classic example is of course to "hoover" and in modern times, to "google". However what Apple are trying to do is to take something *from* the language - the courts should give them a very dusty reply.
RE: "Yeah well"
"i doubt he wrote his stuff using 9 character strings and then randomly collating them much like a jigsaw."
It is also to be hoped that he did it without without flung faeces.
As to being serious I suggest you read your own post again.
The Galaxy S II 16 Gb (depending on where you buy it) is about £50 or 10% cheap*er* than the 16 Gb iPhone4 - that makes it *competitively* priced, not cheap. I have also had hands-on time with one very recently and I can only describe your use of the word "crap" as fanboi trolling.
@LeBourfCurtaine You certainly have a point.
According to Apple themselves they had sold a total of all iPhones of 108 million as of March 2011.
However, if this *is* correct and the figures for the Galaxy S II are *also* correct we can readily see why Cupertino have been experiencing a brown-trouser moment because it implies that Samsung have managed within a few months to generate sales equivalent to 9.25% of *all* the iPhones ever sold as of March this year with only *one* model. As I said earlier on this thread I do not believe we need to search further for the explanation for Cupertino's "legal" war.
Only the most diehard Apple supporter can now be in any doubt.........
.............as to why Apple started their current legal war against Samsung. This is the first time that another phone is perceived by Cupertino as a serious threat to the successful launch of a new iPhone. The original Galaxy S was a warning shot and Apple realised that its follow-up would likely give them a real challenge.
@RegGuy RE "What do you mean"? 57 actually, not 157 .......
....that much of an "old-timer" I am not! Careless phraseology on my part. -:)
@Moz. Just a suggestion......
.........but what about stripping them of their registration if the site is clearly inactive for a given period of time? In other words, "use it or loose it". In the Old West when you staked a claim I seem to remember that you lost it if you failed to work it - could apply the same principle here.
@Mark 65 RE: "Never underestimate the ability of adults to behave like teenagers"
I am very much afraid that you have a point there!
@M Gale "Not often I suggest throwing the book at someone"
I have to say that it sounds like teenage kids to me rather than "adults". The mentality behind that kind of spoof, the importance of the game to them - and the cheating followed by getting indignant at those who have caught you at it. This probably precludes your excellent suggestion at the end of your piece. Where they *are* adults I wish that I really was in a position to suggest the scorpion pits!
RE: "Light speed comms is so last week."
Or maybe last week, this week and next week - all at one and the same "time".
Re: Simple solution
Your suggestion is straightforward, relatively easy to administer (and thereby cheaper to collect), consistent and fair to all concerned. I regret to say that that probably dooms it from the start. -:)
Re: "On the other hand." I agree with your point, the problem is...........
........the only practical answer to all those locally varying sales taxes would be a federal sales tax which would then be redistributed back to the states. Problem with that is that the individual states would sooner gnaw their own legs off than surrender *any* control over sales taxation.
Re "Right. Ok. So what?" I do most sincerely hope that you are not...........
...............any kind of manager/employer. If you are then you are undoubtedly the type of manager/employer who gives workers every good reason to join a trades union.
Creationists say: "Evolution is only a theory"
There is of course bad reporting El Reg and this whole business about misunderstanding what a scientist means when he uses the word "theory" (ie Something for which there is substantial evidence but which we must continue to "destruction test" - and indeed is formulated in such a fashion that it *can* be tested) and the way the word "theory" is used in everyday colloquial speech where it really means what a scientist means when he uses the word "hypothesis". However there are those who *deliberately* blur the differences between those two usages *and* claim that because scientists say at the outset that no theory is set in stone that shows that the theory concerned is only a hypothesis (although they use the word "theory" when making that argument). The creationists are one of the very worst examples of this kind of deliberate obfuscation using it as they do to conceal the fact that their hypothesis about the Origin is completely (as formulated) untestable and at the same time they exploit the confusion generated to claim, for example, that the theory of human evolution and creationism should have equal status in the classroom. In other words I wish it was just "simplistic and ignorant" reporters and other members of the "great unwashed" who failed to understand the concept of scientific theory, testability/falsifiability and the difference between "theory" and "hypothesis" - it is not. There are some heavyweight religious/political fundamentalists out there who deliberately run their propaganda campaigns by wilfully confusing these issues.
"...reluctant to speculate on who might be behind the attack or their motives..."
Funny how such people never seem in any way reluctant when they think the Chinese are involved hmm?
RE: "M$ could end up in seriously big trouble here"
Indeed they most certainly would. It is impossible to believe that the competition authorities in Europe or in the US would sit still for this - the row would be unbelievable. However that is perhaps the point? The article does not quote MS on this subject or indicate whether any attempt to contact them has been made. I for one would be *very* interested in how Redmond would react to this accusation. If MS actually *wanted* to give Win8 the worst possible start they could scarcely have chosen a better way to do it - and it is precisely that point that causes me to have some reservations about this story. Not because I am under any illusions as to what MS might *like* to do if they could get away with it, I just have some difficulty believing that they would think that they *could* get away with this.
@HP Cynic: Can I perhaps be permitted in a fraternal spirit and in the light of what........
..........you have just posted to suggest that you take a look at the Samsung Galaxy SII before you decide? -:)
@Giles Jones Let me see now. You and I are standing in a pub and a guy......
.....near us punches me in the face. Instead of hitting him I decide to get my dibs in my smacking you one. Would you regard this as rational and fair behaviour? No? I am not surprised. However that *is* the logic of *your* argument. I do know how many times Apple have been sued with regard to the iPod but I do know that that has nothing to do with Samsung and provides not the slightest rational justification for Apple starting a war with them.
Shareholders and rational expectations.
The current share-price that Apple can command is a *relatively* new phenomenon (the last six/seven years or so - I believe?) and is heavily dependent on them maintaining the iPad/iPhone driven hegemony in the mobile communications/computing market. How rational and realistic is it to believe that that dominance will continue on the current scale? If some of Microsoft's investors really believe that that kind of rocket-like capital appreciation is something they can rationally say that they are "entitled" to then they should get out more. I say this without any comment on either Apple or Microsoft as companies.
I see that the question of why Samsung only now has begun to sue has been raised.
There are a couple of possibilities here which *might* explain why they only now are doing so.
1. Until relatively recently Apple was a valued customer/partner of Samsung with whom the Korean company had a good working relationship. The iPhones/iPads sold gangbusters and Samsung earned handsomly on all the "bits" they supplied and Sammy had no reason to endanger that relationship.
2. It was only when Apple noticed that Samsung was making some very good kit that was attracting attention and could compete with the iPhone and the iPad that Apple decided to start firing off writs at Samsung.
In short it was only when Apple decided that attempting to cripple Samsung as a *device* producer in the market they are both competing in was more important than their hitherto productive relationship that Samsung started to sue in self-defence. Samsung has (AFAIK) not got a reputation for being *especially* litigious and I do not believe that they would have started their current legal campaign in the absence of the legal assault from Cupertino.
I could not read more than the first couple of sentences.
In fact I can't write any more because my eyes are watering too badly.
"Apple, like Ford, buys parts from suppliers to make their products. If there were suppliers still in the US, they might use them."
Er no, Apple do not "buy parts from suppliers". The entire phone is built in China and is in fact *imported* when sold in America - thus contributing to the US' trade-balance problems.
Potentially good news for those who have their wi-fi on most or...........
..............all of the time on a regular basis. I only wonder how common that usage model is? Or have I misunderstood something here? (Which is of course entirely possible)
@SoftFox Good points.
I suppose all I am really saying is that it is highly likely that we will see x86 devices with considerably longer battery life than quite a few people (for various reasons/motivations) are currently assuming. That the picture being presented of devices so noisy and with such poor battery life and/or performance as to be impracticable/almost useless is in fact a picture with a significantly shorter shelf life than some people are claiming. You are however quite right in saying that we should treat the figures that Intel have provided with considerable caution.
Another year or so?
"Clearly, this tablet is designed to show off Windows 8 at its best, but it raises the question of how well the new OS will run with less powerful systems."
ARM Socs are getting more and more powerful for the same power consumption and even Intel appears (although a little late in the day) to have woken up.
"Intel promises '20X' power reduction with 'Haswell' chips" (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/13/haswell_at_adc_2011/)
The time when hardware capable of running a full song with choruses os without slaughtering the battery is rapidly approaching. I honestly do not believe that is going to be a major issue. Things are developing so fast that in a couple of years time at the very latest the specs of that Sammy that MS have given the attendees at Build will be regarded as *very* ordinary and as you point out are fully capable of running a full fat os without sweating.
I think that I am going to wait until there's a stable beta available..........
...............and then dual-boot it on our home-office rig. In the meantime I noticed a *very* extensive preview of this build on a (non-touch) laptop at Engadget. Very interesting and still very obviously a work in progress.
Negotiating from a postion of weakness.
"Nokia, meanwhile, is actually cutting off one it its routes to market. Chief executive Steven Elop, a former Microsoft executive, is reported to have decided Nokia phones in the US will only be available ready locked into carriers' networks and that unlocked phones that let you – the consumer – pick the network you want will no longer be sold."
Translation: The only way the carriers will give Nokiasoft phones any decent exposure is if they are given exclusivity in the US. Currently both Nokia's situation and that of MS in relation to WP7 mean that they have little or no leverage in negotiation with the likes of AT&T, Verizon etc. Nokia has not cut anything off - it just currently has no bloody choice in realation to the US market. The US carriers, given the chance, will do anything they can get away with to ensure that customers do not get a chance to pick and choose. Nokia's current situation means that they can get away with it with regard to Nokia's phones.
I will certainly buy the original three on blu-ray, they are old favourites and.....
..................I love them. However, I will not part with a penny piece for the "prequels" - in fact you could not pay me to take them away.
@n4blue Yes my shiny's SoC has built in furniture.......
.................try getting that in a 7 inch form-factor!
@Uwe Dippel RE "Virtualisation is one thing"
Microsoft are of course recompling Office to run on ARM and yes you will likely have to interact with it by means of keyboard and mouse. Tell me, are you seriously saying that you would wish, for example, to type a long Word document using a virtual keyboard? I personally think that for a lot of people being able to interact as they wish with the os (whether it is by "prodding" it, or keyboard/mouse combination or, yes, even taking notes with a stylus) dependent upon what they want to do may turn out to be a good solution. I certainly think that there are enough of our fellow earthlings who are capable of chewing gum and walking straight at the same time for them to be willing/happy "to learn two different interfaces for the same application." where they have reason to wish to interact with the app concerned in more than one way. It is also in the nature of the "form and function" equation that there will likely always be apps where the one or the other way of interacting with it will be better/more natural for the individual user.
Just a few points currently:
"Tap this one, and presto, you are back in the familiar Windows user interface, though this is as frustrating as ever if you try to run apps using touch alone."
Why on earth would you? Since you would surely launch the traditional desktop if you *intended* to interact with the device with mouse and keyboard?
"A critical factor is whether Metro apps will cover enough features so that tablet users will rarely need to venture into the desktop."
They will surely venture into the desktop when they wish to use the aforementioned keyboard and mouse for those tasks which are not suited to touch. For example, a usage scenario: I have my shiny new windows fondleslab sitting in a dock on a shelf in our TV bench connected to our TV via our receiver and I wish to post some more wisdom at El Reg from the comfort of my arm chair. Am I going to use the touch UI? Of course not, I will launch desktop and use my wireless keyboard and mouse just as I am doing right now as I type this.
I note that several on the thread appear to have physic powers inasmuch as they already "know" that Win8 is going to be totally pants. I have a seriously radical suggestion. Why don't we wait until we have actually had some hands-on time with a Win8 build (at least a stable beta or better still the RC installed on a device with a touchscreen) *before* we form an opinion about how well its been implemented? You know, something so seriously cutting edge as *knowledge-based* criticism.
RE "Can't make a silk purse from sow's ear."
"Intel promises '20X' power reduction with 'Haswell' chips".
Just goes to show that one should not speak too soon although not until 2013 is a bit of a wait.
Can't make a silk purse from sow's ear..............
.........though interestingly enough Win7 tabs all the same manage about 5% of the tab market despite the fact that Win7 sucks big time as a touch os. That explains perhaps why Fujitsu are bothering to maintain a presence in this segment. It is clear there is a demand, one that I expect they are hoping to have rather more success with at a later date with a Win8 based tablet. It does rather suggest that Redmond's decision to cover both ARM and x86 architectures is not a stupid move. At the moment what appears to be on the horizon from Intel and/or AMD does not look that promising in the context of *tablet* pcs.
Win7 was launched on October 22nd 2009 making it slightly less than.........
.............2 years old. How did you manage to ramp that up to "several years" after launch? Given that they in fact reached those Win7 license figures at 1 year and 11 months it is just possible that his "guesstimate" is not *that* pony.
@Syren Baran "Lost in translation"
Thanks muchly. I am grateful and, to be honest, relieved!
Social-tecnological-pigdogs and their fallen buttons?
I do beg your pardon?
RE: "Seen everything now" Ah but you don't understand - this is tech.
That's the whole point. That's how the really smart wife gets hubby to do at least some of the housework - by persuading him that he is using kit. The sort of stuff he reads about at El Reg. That way she can convince him that its not some *girly* thing, instead its something with buttons, flashing lights and it probably goes "beep, beep" as well.
Crystal ball gazing is of course always fun but should be, as far as possible,..........
". Lenovo claims that its rival has only sold 20,000 of the 1 million GalaxyTabs shipped."
Now, as I have said elsewhere, I do not have the "inside track" on Samsung's sales figures but I would hesitate before I quoted the CEO of a major Chinese rival to South Korea's largest electronics company as any kind of evidence. Especially when, AFAIK, he provided *nothing* to back up that claim. In other words it appears (so far) to be a completely unsupported *allegation*.
Furthermore, how long has the original 'Tab been out? A long time in terms of the rate of development and change in this very young market. The current generation of Samsung's offerings in both tab and phone space appear to be attracting *way* more attention than the release of their very first tab ever did. If we want *evidence* that they may make a real impact we could perhaps point to the "lawyering" from Cupertino which borders on the desperate - they clearly do not have a relaxed attitude to the challenge that Samsung's products may pose them. *My* crystal ball is fairly cloudy at the moment and I am content to await events in this, still, very young and immature market.
@Frostbite: Yeah, that seems to me to be key with this.
That the info does not apparently seem to be available right now (I've been working the "magic piano") does not seem particularly encouraging. If it is no worse than current Li-ion batteries, fine, but the lack of info worries me a bit.
Any info on what they are saying about the amount of charge stored per unit volume in comparison to current Li ion batteries?
Having read this article with growing incredulity I can only say that it......
........it is very clear in this context that of the two ways one can read the expression "smart phone owners" at least one of them is the grandmother of all non sequiturs.
I cannot dispute that you have some point here, however.....
......I pose another question. Ask an average European to name all of the states that the US consists of and at the same time ask an average American to name all the states in the EU. Which of the two groups would do better in your opinion?
@jake "I am not remotely mad at you"
I wrote that somewhat "free-form" and only realised that its structure was somewhat "lacking" after I had sent it in. I only hope that those who read it realise/understand my intention without being to hard on me with regard to my composition!
@Flakey RE "What do you expect"
There is not much I can disagree with in your posting and indeed I feel no impulse to do so. However, given that the majority of us are pretty uninterested in being involved in politics over and beyond voting every fourth or fifth year is it not possible that we, to some extent, get the politicians we deserve? If we would rather 99% of the time think about almost anything else and are definitely uninterested in getting involved ourselves, do we not also have some responsibility for this state of affairs? Might it not at least be a thought worth our consideration that if the "market" in aspiring politicians were somewhat larger than it is at both local and national level then the time-servers and expenses pisstakers might have a much harder time of it? My only point is really that given that we *do* have elections and we *can* throw the bastards out (whichever political flavour we are talking about) is it not the case that *we the people* have *some* responsibility for the current state of affairs?
At least the Finnish accent made them realise..............
..............that your friends were from out of town.
The two-edged sword.
Modern data-processing and communications technology enables us to readily and easily process information, interact with each other with a speed and ease that has never existed before regardless of distance and see/witness events that we otherwise would only ever have read about and seen photographs of often days after. As recently as two centuries or so ago it might have been many days or even weeks between an event and our hearing of it, or our receiving a reply to that letter we had sent someone. The sheer speed and scale of all types of modern communication has an effect on the impact that the world has on us and how we react to it and events. The mainland US had never been attacked since King George had his little dispute with George Washington and even the attack on Pearl Harbour in Hawaii was something that one heard about on the radio or read about in the newspapers and had a certain amount of psychological distance from. When those planes were flown into the towers on that awful day the *whole* of America could *see* and *hear* it happen virtually in real-time and the impact on the collective consciousness of the people of the United States was enormous, leading directly to what Bush and Cheney could get away with and the pernicious home security industry that grew up in the wake of 9/11. "Everyone" saw their nation attacked, everyone "felt" the impact as those horrible videos (more horrifying in their gruesome reality than any horror film could be) showed the plane flying into the tower as if it were a special effect from a new "Die Hard" movie. The very technologies which provide us with so much information and interaction both facilitated the post-event psychology in the US and provided both government and "BigCorp" with the tools with with which to spy on and control us. We as a species are still not quite prepared for the impact for good *and* ill that modern communications technologies have and will have on us as individual human beings living in a society that interacts at a *mass* level in ways and at speeds that are unique in human history.
@StooMonster "Or use it to explain poor sales"
Now I do not pretend to have the inside track on Samsung's sales figures but I would simply point out that that *allegation* regarding the sales of the Galaxy Tab came from the CEO (Lenovo I think?) of a major Chinese rival of South Korea's leading tech company. I would hesitate before I quoted such a source in this context.
@Len Goddard "Real Soon Now"
I am only a couple of years younger than you Len and I think that I must have read the same book - and I'm chuckling at the memory as I write this. It is rather like the traditional expression my dear lady's family use when they celebrate Passover - "next year in Jerusalem".
- +Analysis Microsoft: We're making ONE TRUE WINDOWS to rule us all
- Climate: 'An excuse for tax hikes', scientists 'don't know what they're talking about'
- Apple: We'll unleash OS X Yosemite beta on the MASSES July 24
- Yorkshire cops fail to grasp principle behind BT Fon Wi-Fi network
- White? Male? You work in tech? Let us guess ... Twitter? We KNEW it!